bikinifarm Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Working fine here on a matching pair of Intel DH87MC's for over a week now, each with i217V. No issues observed, wake not tested. Casual testing moving a 17 gig file in respect to hnak's 1000e shows over 25% performance improvement, i217v <-> i217v. Looks and works fine. The highest speed I have seen copying large files is around 65.5 Mbytes per second, which I believe is a good number considering packet overhead etc. Thanks for the good work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastez Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 Working fine here on a matching pair of Intel DH87MC's for over a week now, each with i217V. No issues observed, wake not tested. Casual testing moving a 17 gig file in respect to hnak's 1000e shows over 25% performance improvement, i217v <-> i217v. Looks and works fine. The highest speed I have seen copying large files is around 65.5 Mbytes per second, which I believe is a good number considering packet overhead etc. Thanks for the good work. I would check your settings again, i got 111 mb/s read and 109 mb/s write with blackmagic speedtest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bikinifarm Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 I would check your settings again, i got 111 mb/s read and 109 mb/s write with blackmagic speedtest. The numbers I quoted are sustained copy rates, using a Finder copy of 17 gig sparseimage documents. Burst rates may very well be far higher than the sustained rates I got, which include Finder overhead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mieze Posted March 11, 2015 Author Share Posted March 11, 2015 With Blackmagic Disk Speed Test you get transfer rates near to the theoretical maximum thanks to caching effects, e. g. the test file won't be written/read from Disk anymore but will stay in the file system cache in RAM. In real world scenarios like copying a file in Finder the hard disk often is a limiting factor which reduces the actual transfer rate significantly. Mieze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bikinifarm Posted March 11, 2015 Share Posted March 11, 2015 With Blackmagic Disk Speed Test you get transfer rates near to the theoretical maximum thanks to caching effects, e. g. the test file won't be written/read from Disk anymore but will stay in the file system cache in RAM. In real world scenarios like copying a file in Finder the hard disk often is a limiting factor which reduces the actual transfer rate significantly. Mieze Agreed. The number I provided (65.5Mbytes) was obtained from SSD to SSD. HD to HD I was getting around 52Mbytes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastez Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 With Blackmagic Disk Speed Test you get transfer rates near to the theoretical maximum thanks to caching effects, e. g. the test file won't be written/read from Disk anymore but will stay in the file system cache in RAM. In real world scenarios like copying a file in Finder the hard disk often is a limiting factor which reduces the actual transfer rate significantly. Mieze In finder connected over afp on my nas i got beetween 92 - 114 mb/s read speed and 60 - 110 mb/s write speed, copying a 5 gb dmg file. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fffeee Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Avoid the ambiguity entirely and use iperf. I have three network interfaces in my workstation and did a few 10-second tests over each and they all look similar to this: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.08 GBytes 927 Mbits/sec # Yukon interface [ 5] 0.0-10.0 sec 706 MBytes 592 Mbits/sec # AirPort Extreme interface [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.09 GBytes 934 Mbits/sec # IntelMausi interface So around 115-116MB/s. That Yukon card is a relic, but is very reliable. (Edit: the iperf server in my test is on the same physical network as the client and connected via gigabit ethernet to it's truly horrible RealTek interface on a FreeBSD system) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcds83 Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Hi Mieze, With d6 version, I have no more problem connecting to iMessages.For Time Machine backups, the transfer speed on my LAN is about 30 MB/s. Very fast. My connection has been running at 1 Gigabit for several days but this morning at start after a few minutes of connection at 1-Gigabit, it fell down to 100-Megabit. It's not a question of cable nor a Network configuration because I had no problem before connecting at 1-Gigabit. I restarted my machine, but same problem. See my attached log. Thank you for all your work. Jean-Claude IntelMausi.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mieze Posted March 13, 2015 Author Share Posted March 13, 2015 Hi Mieze, With d6 version, I have no more problem connecting to iMessages. For Time Machine backups, the transfer speed on my LAN is about 30 MB/s. Very fast. My connection has been running at 1 Gigabit for several days but this morning at start after a few minutes of connection at 1-Gigabit, it fell down to 100-Megabit. It's not a question of cable nor a Network configuration because I had no problem before connecting at 1-Gigabit. I restarted my machine, but same problem. There is no evidence for a driver related problem in your kernel log. If selecting the medium manually doesn't resolve the issue, it's most likely some kind of hardware related problem as it persists after the reboot: Bad or inferior cable. Dust on the RJ45 connector. EMI Failure of the switch. etc. Mieze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcds83 Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Thank you for your very quick response. You are right, it was a connector problem. Sorry for disturbing you, I should have solved this myself. JCDS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxv Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Followed install instructions in OP, but got intractable kernel panics on boot like those described by tarasis; applied the same fix mentioned there and deleted: /Library/Preferences/SystemConfiguration/NetworkInterfaces.plist /Library/Preferences/SystemConfiguration/preferences.plist Now the driver seems to work perfectly fine in my machine. Can't really test full throughput yet as only getting a max 100baseTX connection to router (which has gigabit ports). Had this problem previously using AppleIntelE1000e.kext too, which likely suggests a wiring issue—probably involving the ~75ft of 8-y/o cat5e that runs from one end of the house to the other @ router. Guess I'm going to be having fun this wknd swapping that out for cat6… then I'll try posting some speed test results. Anyway, thank you Mieze for making this. Also, semi-related question: Does anyone know why there's an ~15s delay after a reboot before networking activates in OSX? I don't know if this is something specific to my hardware or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastez Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Followed install instructions in OP, but got intractable kernel panics on boot like those described by tarasis; applied the same fix mentioned there and deleted: /Library/Preferences/SystemConfiguration/NetworkInterfaces.plist /Library/Preferences/SystemConfiguration/preferences.plist Now the driver seems to work perfectly fine in my machine. Can't really test full throughput yet as only getting a max 100baseTX connection to router (which has gigabit ports). Had this problem previously using AppleIntelE1000e.kext too, which likely suggests a wiring issue—probably involving the ~75ft of 8-y/o cat5e that runs from one end of the house to the other @ router. Guess I'm going to be having fun this wknd swapping that out for cat6… then I'll try posting some speed test results. Anyway, thank you Mieze for making this. Also, semi-related question: Does anyone know why there's an ~15s delay after a reboot before networking activates in OSX? I don't know if this is something specific to my hardware or not. There is no delay on my machine after reboot, it´s working immediatly. Maybe also a problem related to your cable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxv Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 There is no delay on my machine after reboot, it´s working immediatly. Maybe also a problem related to your cable? Possible, but the WiFi also does the same thing. Which makes me think its something to do with the network stack initialization as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mieze Posted March 13, 2015 Author Share Posted March 13, 2015 Can't really test full throughput yet as only getting a max 100baseTX connection to router (which has gigabit ports). Had this problem previously using AppleIntelE1000e.kext too, which likely suggests a wiring issue—probably involving the ~75ft of 8-y/o cat5e that runs from one end of the house to the other @ router. Guess I'm going to be having fun this wknd swapping that out for cat6… then I'll try posting some speed test results. First, try to clean the RJ-45 connectors/cables from dust. Gigabit ethernet needs all 8 wires to be working. I experienced this issue several times since I switched to gigabit ethernet 6 years ago and in more than 90% the cleaning resolved the issue. Possible, but the WiFi also does the same thing. Which makes me think its something to do with the network stack initialization as a whole. Sounds like a DHCP issue. Maybe you should take a look at the kernel logs and /or the DHCP server's logs. Mieze 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mieze Posted March 14, 2015 Author Share Posted March 14, 2015 I'm making progress with regard to the VMware issue. I created a version of the driver which uses Apple's private network driver interface introduced with 10.8. This new interface has an improved output queue handling and support for packet scheduling with QFQ. Performance and CPU usage seem to be comparable to the version with the traditional interface but it looks like VMware has stopped killing the network stack from time to time. At least I haven't had this issue since I switched over to the new interface. As it was introduced with Mountain Lion there is no way to make the new version work under anything below 10.8. I will publish it during the weekend after running some more tests. Its version number will be 2.0.0d1. Mieze 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avian Posted March 14, 2015 Share Posted March 14, 2015 d6 working wonderfully here on 2 installs (one yosemite, one mavericks). Is jumbo frames still considered way too low a priority to make it into the v2 builds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppleIIGuy Posted March 14, 2015 Share Posted March 14, 2015 D6 is working great. I am noticing copying large files to my NAS it doesnt take as long. Befre it used to copy extreamly slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxv Posted March 14, 2015 Share Posted March 14, 2015 First, try to clean the RJ-45 connectors/cables from dust. Gigabit ethernet needs all 8 wires to be working. I experienced this issue several times since I switched to gigabit ethernet 6 years ago and in more than 90% the cleaning resolved the issue. Makes sense. Tried wiping down all the connectors, but I'm still topping out at 100baseTX. Sounds like a DHCP issue. Maybe you should take a look at the kernel logs and /or the DHCP server's logs. Does seem to be a DHCP issue—I set Ethernet to configure Manually using its usual DHCP allotted params in System Preferences:Networking, and now it works immediately upon startup. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mieze Posted March 14, 2015 Author Share Posted March 14, 2015 Is jumbo frames still considered way too low a priority to make it into the v2 builds? It's not a question of priority but a question if it makes sense or not. After all jumbo frame support is more a marketing feature than a real benefit in most scenarios. Not to forget that jumbo frames are a troublemaker which will increase the number of support requests. That's why I'm reluctant to implement jumbo frame support. Mieze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mieze Posted March 14, 2015 Author Share Posted March 14, 2015 As already announced I just published version 2.0.0d1 a few moments ago. You can find it attached to post #1 of this thread. Good luck! Mieze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roh7 Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 Hi I just gave the driver a try 'cause of those big-data-transfer-problems with hnak's intel1000e. Good news first: it works well, transfer speed is very good - but i got a weird problem: safari always crashes! I rechecked it with i1000e re-installed (checked kextstat that the correct driver is loaded) no safari crash - checked again with mausi-driver: safari crashed. Any other browser (firefox, chrome) did work... Just in case someone noticed my safari problems mentioned here: they're gone with version d6. No problems so far with VMWare Fusion . Transfer Speed via AFP (read) alternates randomly between 50 and 70Mb/s and I have lot of those messages in system.log Mar 15 12:44:28 andromeda kernel[0]: Ethernet [intelMausi]: Not enough descriptors. Stalling. Mar 15 12:44:28 andromeda kernel[0]: Ethernet [intelMausi]: Restart stalled queue! One more change in my original setup is the recent security update 2 days ago. Thanks for your work! roh7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RehabMan Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 As already announced I just published version 2.0.0d1 a few moments ago. You can find it attached to post #1 of this thread. Good luck! Mieze Note that "git log" shows "Version 2.0.0d1", but Info.plist is still 1.0.0d6. It is due to Module Version=1.0.0d6 in the project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mieze Posted March 15, 2015 Author Share Posted March 15, 2015 Note that "git log" shows "Version 2.0.0d1", but Info.plist is still 1.0.0d6. It is due to Module Version=1.0.0d6 in the project. You have to select the right target before you build the driver. Mieze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mieze Posted March 15, 2015 Author Share Posted March 15, 2015 Just in order to be on the save side: is there anybody still experiencing random "Tx stalled" messages with the current versions (1.0.0d6/2.0.0d1) of the driver? Mieze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RehabMan Posted March 15, 2015 Share Posted March 15, 2015 You have to select the right target before you build the driver. Mieze Is there some reason to have two separate targets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts